The grid (View > Grid and Helplines > Display Grid) is showing tiny dots that become barely perceivable when zooming in. It was suggested on the mailing list https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/msg08925.html to change the dots to symbol such as a plus that increases it's size on zoom. This idea is supported by the design team.
Reported in bug 120720 *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 120720 ***
*** Bug 120720 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
(In reply to Xisco Faulí from comment #2) > *** Bug 120720 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** It was actually the original and attachment 145842 [details], attachment 145843 [details], and attachment 145875 [details] are quite useful.
"Writer, Calc, Impress, Draw" all use this grid design.
Created attachment 203612 [details] POC: writer 75% zoom
Created attachment 203613 [details] POC: writer 100% zoom
Created attachment 203614 [details] POC: writer 200% zoom
Created attachment 203615 [details] POC: calc 100% zoom
Created attachment 203616 [details] POC: calc 200% zoom
Created attachment 203617 [details] POC: draw 100% zoom
Created attachment 203618 [details] POC: draw 200% zoom
Created attachment 203619 [details] POC: impress 100% zoom
Created attachment 203620 [details] POC: impress 200% zoom
Created attachment 203621 [details] POC: writer grid with subdivisions
Created attachment 203622 [details] POC: writer grid with unequal grid sizes
I created a quick proof of concept implementation to see what the proposed solution would look like. I attached screenshots of this POC. There are two versions, where the plus symbol size has a proportion of 1 / 4 and 1 / 8 compared to the grid distance.
I'd go with the less obtrusive solution, so 1/8.
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #17) > I'd go with the less obtrusive solution, so 1/8. Yes the plus marks remain a needed enhancement to the grid overlay. But visibility at HiDPI DE display resolutions might be more helpful at 1/4 ratio, any option to follow the HiDPI detection? Or otherwise scale the 1/8 upward towards 1/4 or even 1/2 at HiDPI, or even dynamically with high canvas zoom > 200%?
I would prefer, when the cross at the main grid is larger than the subdivision markers.
(In reply to Tamás Zolnai from comment #15) > Created attachment 203622 [details] > POC: writer grid with unequal grid sizes Such unequal grids are kind of uncomfortable to see, and IMHO to work with. I would keep them symmetric for the overlay.
(In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #20) > (In reply to Tamás Zolnai from comment #15) > > Created attachment 203622 [details] > > POC: writer grid with unequal grid sizes > > Such unequal grids are kind of uncomfortable to see, and IMHO to work with. > I would keep them symmetric for the overlay. But different distances for horizontal and vertical are possible in current LibreOffice. I don't actually know who uses it, but can imaging that they might be useful, if you want to align the graphical grid with the baseline grid or with the raster of East Asian scripts.
(In reply to Regina Henschel from comment #21) > (In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #20) > > (In reply to Tamás Zolnai from comment #15) > > > Created attachment 203622 [details] > > > POC: writer grid with unequal grid sizes > > > > Such unequal grids are kind of uncomfortable to see, and IMHO to work with. > > I would keep them symmetric for the overlay. > > But different distances for horizontal and vertical are possible in current > LibreOffice. I don't actually know who uses it, but can imaging that they > might be useful, if you want to align the graphical grid with the baseline > grid or with the raster of East Asian scripts. Correct as usual :-) Tools -> Options -> Writer|Calc|Draw|Impress -> Grid with defaults of symmetric increments, but users can adjust...
A few notes: * Using '+' is only relevant where there's an actual intersection of lines. In some of the screenshots we see ++++++ + + + + ++++++ instead of +----+ | | | | +----+ * Please don't create a situation where the grid is too distracting from the contents, the shapes. With some of the screenshots - it _is_ very distracting. * The opening comment complained about grid indicators becoming "barely perceivable" - many users want exactly that: Something you only notice if you're paying attention to it, and is otherwise easy to ignore. So, even though I like plus marks over dots (for intersections), I am worried that a patch here would tie up that issue with the issue of changing grid indicators' weight, darkness, width etc. So - perhaps separate the two issues? Or make the weight, darkness width changes optional?
(In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #23) > instead of > > +----+ > | | > | | > +----+ A dash in that direction as subdivision marker is not helpful in positioning an object. So better go with dot or small cross.
(In reply to Regina Henschel from comment #24) > A dash in that direction as subdivision marker is not helpful in positioning > an object. So better go with dot or small cross. Oh, sorry, I didn't mean to suggest dashes. Dots are fine (or at least - that would be a subject for another bug). I just mean that it shouldn't be a cross.
Well, I see some contradicting opinions here. @Eyal Rozenberg, about your notes. As I see it, based on your notes, you are actually against changing the current behavior. The notes you added basically describe the current behavior of Draw / Impress. In Draw / Impress, the grid has a 3x3 pixel cross for the main grid points and a 1 pixel dot for the secondary grid points. So it seems to me you challenge the decision of the design team to increase the visibility of the grid. Reading the related design meeting minutes: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Meetings/2018-10-24 and also reading this ticket and other related tickets, it's clear to me that the design team agreed on changing the current behavior (including Draw / Impress), because having a barely perceivable grid is not good. So my suggestion for you is to discuss this with the design team via the mailing list or at the next design meeting. If the design team as a whole says that the current behavior in Draw / Impress is good as it is now, then I guess this ticket can be closed as won't do or something like that. (Note: In Writer, all points are drawn as 1 pixel dots, so the 3x3 crosses can still be introduced for the main grid points in this case.) For the time being, I'll go with the idea that something should be changed to increase the visibility of the grid, as the existence of this ticket indicates.
Created attachment 203694 [details] POC 2: writer with small crosses 100% zoom
Created attachment 203695 [details] POC 2: writer with small crosses 200% zoom
Created attachment 203696 [details] POC 2: impress with small crosses 100% zoom
Created attachment 203697 [details] POC 2: impress with small crosses 200% zoom
So, after reading all the comments here, I see there is no clear agreement on how this "zoomable plus symbol" should be implemented. Also, I see some technical problems with implementing such behavior reliably. So I leave that idea now. I've got another idea, which is a good compromise. It improves the visibility of the grid without introducing too much clutter. The idea is simply to do what the title of this ticket says: "Change grid indicator from dot to plus", meaning replacing all of the grid points that are currently displayed as 1 pixel dots with 3x3 pixel crosses. The same type of crosses that are already used for main grid points in Impress / Draw. I think it's a small step toward improving the situation. These small crosses are not much bigger than the 1-pixel dots, so it's not a huge change in the visual appearance, but it still improves the visibility. This idea was also suggested by Pedro: https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=117348#c18 I added some screenshots how this solution would look like (screenshot with POC 2 prefix).
The new screenshots contain both the current behavior and the new behavior with the small, 3x3 crosses.
(In reply to Tamás Zolnai from comment #26) > So it seems to me you challenge the decision of the design team to > increase the visibility of the grid. Wait, when did the design team decide to increase the visibility of the grid generally? > > Reading the related design meeting minutes: > https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Meetings/2018-10-24 > and also reading this ticket and other related tickets, it's clear to me > that the design team agreed on changing the current behavior (including Draw > / Impress), because having a barely perceivable grid is not good. If anything, it is clear the design team agreed on _not_ changing the current behavior, but rather only allowing for _optional_, alternative, grid drawing modes. Or rather, it agreed on a change _into_ the current behavior. That discussion was prompted by bug 117348, about making the grid color somewhat darker. That prompted the design meeting discussion, and eventually - the change was made, so we already have a visibility increase. In the meeting, several additional ideas were brought up, and the conclusion was to file additional bugs for each of them; again, as options. > So it seems to me you challenge the ... [the notion of] increas[ing] the visibility of the grid. And you are right. The grid should have low visibility by default. Higher visibility is always achievable using rulers, or concrete shapes that delinieate things - but if the grid were made high-visibility always, one would not be able to reduce it. But the objection to all-plusses is separate from that. Even in high-visibility, a distinction should be made between grid line intersections and grid lines segments without an intersection. > For the time being, I'll go with the idea that something should be changed > to increase the visibility of the grid, as the existence of this ticket > indicates. Please don't do that - except as an _option_. Let's not have a repeat of the active-cell-rectangle situation again. That aside, I think it would be a good idea if you and I would bring this up in another design meeting.
I see. So as it stands now, I stop working on this ticket, because it seems this enhancement was not actually approved by the design team. I would rather not invest more of my time into something that is actually blocked by the design team.
(In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #33) > (In reply to Tamás Zolnai from comment #26) > > So it seems to me you challenge the decision of the design team to > > increase the visibility of the grid. > > Wait, when did the design team decide to increase the visibility of the grid > generally? See the description of the bug: "change the dots to symbol such as a plus that increases it's size on zoom. This idea is supported by the design team." It says the idea was supported by the design team. I don't see anything about optional in the title or in the ticket description.